- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Issues
- Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Magazine Archives
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
AmSpecBlog
Specter Takes on Holder
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) is the squishiest of the squishy. But he appears to be growing a backbone when it comes to Attorney General-designate Eric Holder. Reports the New York Times:
Before Tuesday, Mr. Specter had been mildly critical of Mr. Holder's role in President Bill Clinton's pardon of the fugitive financier Marc Rich. He said Tuesday that he would wait until the hearing next week to decide how he would vote, but in the Senate speech he let loose on Mr. Holder, comparing him with Mr. Gonzales in his ability to maintain independence from the president.
Mr. Specter raised questions about Mr. Holder's role as deputy attorney general on a range of issues that included an investigation into the 1993 federal siege in Waco, Tex., that left David Koresh and about 80 of his Branch Davidian followers dead, and an espionage investigation involving a nuclear scientist, Wen Ho Lee.
But he saved his sharpest criticism for Mr. Holder's role as deputy attorney general in three controversies in Mr. Clinton's second term: Mr. Clinton's pardon of Mr. Rich in 2001, the president's decision in 1999 to grant clemency to 16 members of a Puerto Rican militant nationalist group, and the Justice Department's rejection in 1997 of an independent counsel to examine accusations of campaign finance abuse by Vice President Al Gore and the White House. In each case, Mr. Specter said, Mr. Holder appeared to go against the advice of career professionals at the Justice Department.
"Further inquiry is warranted on the issue of Mr. Holder's independence to follow the facts without respect to political bias," Mr. Specter said in his prepared statement.
It could be all talk, of course. But Sen. Specter has pointed to reasons for fighting the Holder nomination. A return to the bad old Clinton Justice Department surely isn't "change that we can believe in."
Comments
Leave a Comment
- Downgrading American Medical Care
- Portrait of an Artist
- Hanging Out With the Repo Man
Iran in Turmoil
Is the Obama administration doing a good job handling the aftermath of the election in Iran?
Participating in this survey will subscribe you to the American Spectator email newsletter. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Interloper| 1.7.09 @ 9:15AM
I suspect a return to the much worse Bush, Ashcroft and Gonzales Justice Department is what Doug Bandow would like.
As for Specter, he is toast. With the GOP having moved even farther to the Right and lead by even more backward Southerners, Specter will not make it out of the primary in his upcoming effort to keep his Senate seat.
tony| 1.7.09 @ 9:45AM
Interloper:
Good to see you hitting this topic also. Let's just assume, for sake of argument, that I agree with your prior post. That means we can put the politics aside. Let's also try not to make this a racial issue. After all, Eric Holder is black, so the temptation will be for you to once again accuse me of bigotry. Lastly, I will tell you that I'm no particular fan of Arlen Specter.
Instead, let's try to simply look at the facts. Everything that Specter said is acccurate and worthy of inspection. Don't you think it's worthwhile to look into these matters to determine whether or not this is the man to be attorney general?
I don't believe we've ever been given any sort of reasonable explanation as to why the FALN terrorists were pardoned. Why not press Mr. Holder to give us some answers? Let's hear why Marc Rich was pardoned.
Instead of the usual b.s., let's try to stay focused on the issue.
Periwinkel| 1.7.09 @ 9:45AM
Excuse me, Interloper, but may I point out that at no point in the last eight years did anyone in Bush Justice Department facilitate the sale of presidential pardons! That is purely a Democrat/Bill Clinton/Eric Holder phenomenon.
Interloper| 1.7.09 @ 12:02PM
LOL @ Periwinkel (sic)! If you had been reading the news recently, you would not have made that statement. Not only did they sell a pardon, they were forced to accept its return without a packaging fee.
Furthermore, the Bush administration was selling everything including the kitchen sink through its Abramoff connections.
Tony, Specter's problem is not the Democrats and certainly not Eric Holder. His problem is with Republicans. Specter has been a target of the far Right, particularly the 'end all taxation' Club for Growth for years. They've spent millions of dollars trying to unseat him, so his seat can be taken by someone more hidebound.
Specter is attempting to court the Right by attacking Holder, who was a pretty capable deputy attorney general. He has raised the 'terrorists' issue because it is red meat for the hounds he is baiting. Furthermore, since Holder was an assistant, the responsibility for those decisions did not ultimately lie with him.
Let's not kid ourselves that Holder's race is certainly part of what the far Right holds against him, just as President-elect Barack Obama's is.
I do not think anything can save Specter, including this cynical effort to court his enemies.
tony| 1.7.09 @ 12:07PM
Interloper:
Once again I tried to engage you in a civilized discussion. Once again you display your immaturity and your obsession with race. If Mr. Holder was white, I would have said the same thing. But of course, as stated on another thread, you obviously know me better than I know myself.
Interloper| 1.7.09 @ 12:15PM
Tony, as I said, Spectre is using Holder as a shield against his fellow Republicans. That is the main point of this maneuver.
Race is an ancillary issue, but certainly part of appealing to the far Right.
It is unfortunate that you have such a difficult time accepting intelligent analysis.
tony| 1.7.09 @ 12:16PM
Message to Periwinkel and anyone else who thinks of discussing things with Interloper:
Don't bother. Interloper is not a serious person, but instead a perpetual adolescent who is incapable of rational discourse. Like most leftists, his tactic is to invalidate opposing opinion through demonization. For example, if you attempt to discuss a matter involving a liberal black politician or public figure with him, you are labeled a bigot or racist if you disagree with Interloper's vaunted opinion.
My advice is to ignore Interloper. There are other liberals who post here that are willing to engage in a civil debate. Perhaps one day Interloper will mature and discover that people can actually disagree with him on matters of race or be critical of a minority without being guilty of bigotry. Then he will be a worthwhile debate opponent. Until that day, best to just ignore his sophomoric posts.
Interloper| 1.7.09 @ 3:24PM
Methinks that the reason some folks hang out in impermeable bubbles of the far Right is they cannot hold their own in intelligent, mainstream conversation. They run and they try to hide.
Another reason Specter's ploy will not work is the age of the issues he wants to raise. They are downright hoary. Much of the electorate barely remembers the Clinton administration. Those that do recall it fondly.
Kat| 1.7.09 @ 11:55PM
tony, why do you think AmSpec gets hit with one or two leftist commenters on a regular basis? I think we must be on a liberal list or something. Watch: Interloper will be gone one day, but sure enough, another noxious liberal will take his place. Interloper is just one in a long line. It must be chance--couldn't be planned, right?
Your career advice guide | 1.23.09 @ 12:24AM
Well, to each his own. Everybody has the right to free speech and he just said what he felt is right.